Breaking: Christie to endorse Romney

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

If you guys nominate Cain, it will be like Obama vs Keyes for the US Senate again.

Not exactly. Keyes moved to the state a few days before the election. He isn't Hillary and Illinois is not New York so that didn't work.

Except that he didn't mention Keynes, he was referencing Alan Keyes, the slightly odd conservative. In that election, Obama won with 70% of the vote.

Because he tried to pull a Hillary and more than 50% of Illinois voters are not stupid. At least not ALL the time.

There is no comparison with Cain

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

A national sales tax is not a bad idea. How else would you tax illegal aliens and other tax evaders?

Sales taxes are regressive. Cain's "plan" will be a huge tax hike for the vast majority of Americans and a huge gift to the few. Not gonna happen.

[mawilson 2,133]

Sales taxes are regressive. Cain's "plan" will be a huge tax hike for the vast majority of Americans and a huge gift to the few. Not gonna happen.

The sales tax burden is offset by a reduction in income taxes - for those who pay income taxes, of course.

Those who don't pay any income tax? Tough titties - about time they started contributing something.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That is not true and as long as it continues to be the centerpiece of the discussion more and more people will see that. Cain answered that very well last night. Let him answer it more and more.

You eliminate payroll tax and add sales tax, net wash really especially since sales tax does not apply to used goods. You aplly a 9 % income tax to some people that pay -0- now but reduce corporate taxes which are being passed on to them now. People evading taxes will now pay taxes (though not as much as with the fair tax)

But to continue the dialog is a good thing. Keep stating that and keep allowing Cain to refute it. Keep talking!

A family of 4 making $50K/year pays payroll taxes today and not much more. Under Cain's "plan" they would pay 18% of their income in taxes to the Fed. That's a huge hike no matter how you slice it. And if you believe that a reduction in corporate taxes would be passed down to consumers, or that the 8% payroll taxes currently paid by employers would suddenly show up in your paycheck, I've got a nice bridge to sell.

The sales tax burden is offset by a reduction in income taxes - for those who pay income taxes, of course.

Those who don't pay any income tax? Tough titties - about time they started contributing something.

You can fantasize about a regressive federal tax system all you want. It's not gonna happen. What can I say? Tough titties...

Edited October 12, 2011 by Mr. Big Dog

[mawilson 2,133]

You can fantasize about a regressive federal tax system all you want. It's not gonna happen. What can I say? Tough titties...

We'll see. All Republican candidates have more or less the same ideas - broaden the base, simplify and reduce margin rates. Doing all that and keeping it revenue neutral is practically impossible without some form of VAT or sales tax.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

A family of 4 making $50K/year pays payroll taxes today and not much more. Under Cain's "plan" they would pay 18% of their income in taxes to the Fed. That's a huge hike no matter how you slice it. And if you believe that a reduction in corporate taxes would be passed down to consumers, or that the 8% payroll taxes currently paid by employers would suddenly show up in your paycheck, I've got a nice bridge to sell.

You can fantasize about a regressive federal tax system all you want. It's not gonna happen. What can I say? Tough titties...

It is going to be necessary to pay off the charge cards. Sucks but it has to happen or we cannot address anything else. If you took ALL the money the "rich" have it wouldn;t work

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

We'll see. All Republican candidates have more or less the same ideas - broaden the base, simplify and reduce margin rates. Doing all that and keeping it revenue neutral is practically impossible without some form of VAT or sales tax.

The current income tax code - which is progressive - contains some 1.1 trillion dollars (p.a.) in tax spending. Get rid of that and you have a broader tax base. You can then also lower rates across the board to keep it revenue neutral if that's what you want to do. Can all be done without making the tax system regressive via a national sales tax or VAT.

[mawilson 2,133]

The current income tax code - which is progressive - contains some 1.1 trillion dollars (p.a.) in tax spending. Get rid of that and you have a broader tax base. You can then also lower rates across the board to keep it revenue neutral if that's what you want to do. Can all be done without making the tax system regressive via a national sales tax or VAT.

No thanks, I'll keep fantasizing about a "regressive" system that everyone pays a little something into and has skin in the game.

Such a terrible idea, I know. God forbid the poor contribute a few pennies.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No thanks, I'll keep fantasizing about a "regressive" system that everyone pays a little something into and has skin in the game.

Such a terrible idea, I know. God forbid the poor contribute a few pennies.

They already do and would do so even more if you eliminated the tax spending. Everyone pays - on a progressive basis. Regressive taxation is what happens at the state and local level already. No need to make matters worse.

[^_^ 5,021]

You guys need to stop talking about titties, some people are trying to get work done.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

You guys need to stop talking about titties, some people are trying to get work done.

ok, fine!